Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

digitalPhant0m writes: "A story at the L.A. Times details how Verizon Wireless has started pushing the envelope (or downright abusing it) when it comes to tracking users without their knowledge. The company said, 'In addition to the customer information that's currently part of the program, we will soon use an anonymous, unique identifier we create when you register on our websites. This identifier may allow an advertiser to use information they have about your visits to websites from your desktop computer to deliver marketing messages to mobile devices on our network.' While newsworthy, the rate of privacy abuse revelations over the last few years makes it unsurprising."

Of course - but now they're getting enough money to push that colonoscope all the way up to your teeth

(...or did you not know why it is that they charge so damned much for such piddly little bandwidth caps, while you're just-as-able to get unlimited data/voice/text on a Net10-style or similar carrier, using the *same* phones and towers, but for a fraction of the price?)

This time there surely must be a law that stops this. Mobile devices may pay by the minute for incoming communications. Therefore receiving an unwanted ad is a form of taking and as such must not be allowed. The same could be said of a PC if one has a monetary penalty for receiving too much data.

It's different because with Google, you're paying for the services your using with this personal data and everyone knows that's the deal. With crap like what Verizon is doing, they're double-dipping, making us pay twice (once with money, once again with our personal data) and not being clear that they're selling you out.

I agree. I've been doing this for a long time now. When I see companies using awful practices like this, or ad that come through companies or ad agencies that engage in tracking, I make it a point to avoid buying those products and services. I don't intend it as a punishment or boycott, but it's more that I consider these practices to be despicable and I try my best to avoid doing business with companies that do despicable things.

Which president signed the DMCA.Which president created the most expansive government intrusion into our personal life, aka Obamacare?Which president continues to sign off on FBI, DHS and NSA intrusions into our personal lives?Which president treats the Constitution and other federal law as suggestions?Which president has repeatedly lied about his administration's transparency?

Which president created the most expansive government intrusion into our personal life, aka Obamacare?

I would not consider that the most expansive, or even the most dangerous. Not even close. It has nothing on the TSA or the NSA, which are much more egregious violations of our fundamental liberties, and the latter even happens in broad daylight.

Which president continues to sign off on FBI, DHS and NSA intrusions into our personal lives?

All of them played a part.

Which president treats the Constitution and other federal law as suggestions?

That I can see? All of them.

Which president has repeatedly lied about his administration's transparency?

Plenty.

That's not to say that Obama isn't an evil scumbag, but all of them are. There's a bipartisan effort to strip us of our basic liberties and shred the constitu

"Which president signed the DMCA.Which president created the most expansive government intrusion into our personal life, aka Obamacare?Which president continues to sign off on FBI, DHS and NSA intrusions into our personal lives?Which president treats the Constitution and other federal law as suggestions?Which president has repeatedly lied about his administration's transparency?"

Which Republican fag are you shilling for is the more prudent question.

From http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/faqs/AccountManagement/mobile_ads.html

Can I refuse permission to use my information for Relevant Mobile Advertising?

Yes, you can notify us that you do not want us to use your information for Relevant Mobile Advertising by visiting www.vzw.com/myprivacy or by calling (866) 211-0874.

Note: if you have a multi-line account, you must indicate your privacy choices with respect to each individual line.

In addition, if you would like to prevent third party advertising entities from using information they have about your web browsing across sites unrelated to Verizon, including the use of this information in the Relevant Mobile Advertising program, you can opt-out at www.aboutads.info.

I went to the Verizon Wireless privacy [vzw.com] link and both lines (my wife's and mine) were already opted out. It is very possible that I has previously heard of this and changed my settings, though it was not done recently.

I tried to go to the " autoads [aboutads.info]" page, but I found that to opt out, I had to enable both javascript (no surprise) and cookies. Also, the opt out is shown as a beta tool, so even if I allow cookies and javascript, who knows if it will actually do anything. Hmmm.

Better still: hit them in the wallet. Get an all-you-can eat deal with tee mobil if your favorite areas are signal-covered. My bill dropped by 60%. Yeah, I loved Verizon coverage. But they're also a proponent of the end of net neutrality. My strong suggestion: if you're a Verizon customer, vote with your wallet and get the hell out of there. Not that GSM and LTE via t-mobile might be any less fraught with location-based crap, rather, we don't have a vote in America any more: just your $$$.

From my experience, Sprint is able to offer unlimited data transfer because even if you max out the connection 24/7, you aren't going to hit 10 GB in a month. I couldn't even stream 92kB/s pandora streams.

Just want to give a second to T-Mobile. While their coverage is paltry compared to Verizon, I dropped Verizon (and had a poor time with their customer service trying to get pro-rated) back in October and am quite happy with my decision, even with that extra pain.

Since I barely use my phone I got a pay-as-you-go plan and, at least as I was informed, I can easily upgrade that to a monthly no-contract plan if I need to. (I'll be testing that next month when I upgrade briefly since I'm going on a trip I think I

My wife and I had been on Virginmobile since 2003, but her phone died about a year ago while she was visiting her sister out of town. Instead of calling me and asking what she should get to replace it, she signs up with Verizon on a 2 year contract and a fairly nice featurephone. They got her on a $40/mo 700min plan, which for her is a waste of about 600 minutes/month.. She's lucky to do 100 min/mo.. Just recently I discovered Ting.com, part of the old Tucows.com group. They run on Sprint's towers, and have

She acknowledged that a customer's mobile number has to be known to marketers so they can target ads to that specific user, but insisted that the information collected from home computers remains anonymous.

They give out your phone number so marketers can spam you with text messages, but you remain anonymous. Got it.

I knew something was up when they changed the permissions requirements on their mobile "My Verizon" app I used to use to pay my bill. The new permissions included, well, access to just about everything on my device. I was understandably not going to put up with that, so I reverted to using their website. Now their website is going to (attempt) to track me and then send the details of my web browsing to advertisers, uniquely ID'd and linked to my mobile phone? I'm glad I'm off contract because I am out of here.

If this "anonymous, unique identifier" is a fiction, the "privacy abuse" is obvious.

On the other hand, if the "anonymous, unique identifier" truly is anonymous, where is the "privacy abuse"? We're going to have ads served to us regardless. Better to have ads that are relevant to my interests than random, irrelevant ads.

In the day and age of cheap large-scale data processing, any unique identifier that is connected to more than a few behavioral data points is inherently non-anonymous.

Look at it this way - log2(7 billion) is approx 32. So, 32 bits of information (32 true/false questions, cleverly chosen) is all it takes to uniquely identify more or less any person on the planet. Reality is a bit messier, but also many bits will be far more useful than true/false (for instance even a "cleaned" IP that only has the leading tw

Your IF condition is false. Being labelled with a "unique identifier" is the opposite of anonymous. Whether the unique identifier happens to be a person's name or a serial number acting as a substitute for a name makes no difference.

If this "anonymous, unique identifier" is a fiction, the "privacy abuse" is obvious.

On the other hand, if the "anonymous, unique identifier" truly is anonymous, where is the "privacy abuse"? We're going to have ads served to us regardless. Better to have ads that are relevant to my interests than random, irrelevant ads.

I disagree. Ads that don't concern me are easier to ignore. "Targeted Advertizing" is a pretty name for "Manipulation of Potential Customers".

My contract just ended finally. So I am voting with my wallet and going no contract with another carrier and shaving half my bill in the process. There are decent phones out there for the cost of a "subsidized' contract phone that still perform well for mine and my wife's usage scenario.

So they create an "anonymous, unique identifier" when you register on their website. Anonymous for who? They obviously have a link between you, the registration on the website, and this unique identifier. Where does the anonymous bit come in?

I don't see how this is not a wiretapping law abuse. They are collecting data above and beyond there own site and business. They should have zero right to collect where we go and what we do. The Police need a search warrant to gain this information Call or write your elected officials maybe a complaint to the FCC too. So now a business can do anything they want since we buy there products i just cant see how this is legal